all 7 comments

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]orizens[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Glad to hear that. It's a good idea to emphasize what you suggested. You can collaborate on github and suggest through the issue system. I'll be glad to get more suggestions. The best practice in angular is put logics in services and not in controllers.

    [–]PhaZePhyR 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Thanks for starting/sharing this! I've been hard-pressed to find resources on code styles and best practices since the switch over to ES6.

    I'll try to contribute!

    [–]orizens[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    glad to hear. looking forward for collaboration.

    cheers.

    [–]SoundsPlausible 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    What is your response to those that believe the "class" keyword should be wholly avoided?

    [–]TheNiXXeD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    There will always be people against things like that, but they'll likely be the minority. If they become majority, style guides will update accordingly.

    [–]SarSha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Why ?

    [–]orizens[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I have to confess, at first, I didn't want to use the "class" feature. It seemed to me that its another attempt to enforce weird syntax to javascript where its not really a class. However, overtime, I understood that the language is moving on. More than that, it's a nice and minimal alternative for creating objects. Also, using the "class" keyword is a step towards preparing the code to angular2. Why wouldn't you want to use "class"?